First-in-human study of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of single and multiple oral doses of SAR247799, a selective G-protein-biased sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor-1 agonist for endothelial protection.

AIMS: SAR247799 is a selective G-protein-biased sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor-1 (S1P1 ) agonist with potential to restore endothelial function in vascular pathologies. SAR247799, a first-in-class molecule differentiated from previous S1P1 -desensitizing molecules developed for multiple sclerosis, can activate S1P1 without desensitization and consequent lymphopenia. The aim was to characterize SAR247799 for its safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (activation and desensitization). METHODS: SAR247799 was administered orally to healthy subjects in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study with single (2.5-37.5 mg) or 2-week once-daily (0.5-15 mg) doses. An open-label single dose pilot food-interaction arm with 10 mg SAR247799 in cross-over design was also performed. RESULTS: SAR247799 was well tolerated and, at the higher end of the dose ranges, caused the expected dose-dependent pharmacodynamics associated with S1P1 activation (heart rate reduction) and S1P1 desensitization (lymphocyte count reduction). SAR247799 demonstrated dose-proportional increases in exposure and was eliminated with an apparent terminal half-life of 31.2-33.1 hours. Food had a small effect on the pharmacokinetics of SAR247799. SAR247799 had a low volume of distribution (7-23 L), indicating a potential to achieve dose separation for endothelial vs cardiac S1P1 activation pharmacology. A supratherapeutic dose (10 mg) of SAR247799 produced sustained heart rate reduction over 14 days, demonstrating cardiac S1P1 activation without tachyphylaxis. Sub-lymphocyte-reducing doses (≤5 mg) of SAR247799, which, based on preclinical data, are projected to activate S1P1 and exhibit endothelial-protective properties, had minimal-to-no heart rate reduction and displayed no marked safety findings. CONCLUSION: SAR247799 is suitable for exploring the biological role of endothelial S1P1 activation without causing receptor desensitization.

Endothelial-protective effects of a G-protein-biased sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor-1 agonist, SAR247799, in type-2 diabetes rats and a randomized placebo-controlled patient trial.

AIMS: SAR247799 is a G-protein-biased sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor-1 (S1P1 ) agonist designed to activate endothelial S1P1 and provide endothelial-protective properties, while limiting S1P1 desensitization and consequent lymphocyte-count reduction associated with higher doses. The aim was to show whether S1P1 activation can promote endothelial effects in patients and, if so, select SAR247799 doses for further clinical investigation. METHODS: Type-2 diabetes patients, enriched for endothelial dysfunction (flow-mediated dilation, FMD <7%; n = 54), were randomized, in 2 sequential cohorts, to 28-day once-daily treatment with SAR247799 (1 or 5 mg in ascending cohorts), placebo or 50 mg sildenafil (positive control) in a 5:2:2 ratio per cohort. Endothelial function was assessed by brachial artery FMD. Renal function, biomarkers and lymphocytes were measured following 5-week SAR247799 treatment (3 doses) to Zucker diabetic fatty rats and the data used to select the doses for human testing. RESULTS: The maximum FMD change from baseline vs placebo for all treatments was reached on day 35; mean differences vs placebo were 0.60% (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.34 to 1.53%; P = .203) for 1 mg SAR247799, 1.07% (95% CI 0.13 to 2.01%; P = .026) for 5 mg SAR247799 and 0.88% (95% CI -0.15 to 1.91%; P = .093) for 50 mg sildenafil. Both doses of SAR247799 were well tolerated, did not affect blood pressure, and were associated with minimal-to-no lymphocyte reduction and small-to-moderate heart rate decrease. CONCLUSION: These data provide the first human evidence suggesting endothelial-protective properties of S1P1 activation, with SAR247799 being as effective as the clinical benchmark, sildenafil. Further clinical testing of SAR247799, at sub-lymphocyte-reducing doses (≤5 mg), is warranted in vascular diseases associated with endothelial dysfunction.

Dupilumab in persistent asthma with elevated eosinophil levels.

BACKGROUND: Moderate-to-severe asthma remains poorly treated. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of dupilumab (SAR231893/REGN668), a fully human monoclonal antibody to the alpha subunit of the interleukin-4 receptor, in patients with persistent, moderate-to-severe asthma and elevated eosinophil levels. METHODS: We enrolled patients with persistent, moderate-to-severe asthma and a blood eosinophil count of at least 300 cells per microliter or a sputum eosinophil level of at least 3% who used medium-dose to high-dose inhaled glucocorticoids plus long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs). We administered dupilumab (300 mg) or placebo subcutaneously once weekly. Patients were instructed to discontinue LABAs at week 4 and to taper and discontinue inhaled glucocorticoids during weeks 6 through 9. Patients received the study drug for 12 weeks or until a protocol-defined asthma exacerbation occurred. The primary end point was the occurrence of an asthma exacerbation; secondary end points included a range of measures of asthma control. Effects on various type 2 helper T-cell (Th2)-associated biomarkers and safety and tolerability were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were assigned to the dupilumab group, and 52 patients were assigned to the placebo group. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. Three patients had an asthma exacerbation with dupilumab (6%) versus 23 with placebo (44%), corresponding to an 87% reduction with dupilumab (odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.02 to 0.28; P<0.001). Significant improvements were observed for most measures of lung function and asthma control. Dupilumab reduced biomarkers associated with Th2-driven inflammation. Injection-site reactions, nasopharyngitis, nausea, and headache occurred more frequently with dupilumab than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with persistent, moderate-to-severe asthma and elevated eosinophil levels who used inhaled glucocorticoids and LABAs, dupilumab therapy, as compared with placebo, was associated with fewer asthma exacerbations when LABAs and inhaled glucocorticoids were withdrawn, with improved lung function and reduced levels of Th2-associated inflammatory markers. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01312961.).

A Pilot Study to Assess the Feasibility of Collecting and Transmitting Clinical Trial Data with Mobile Technologies.

BACKGROUND: The use of mobile technologies for data capture and transmission has the potential to streamline clinical trials, but researchers lack methods for collecting, processing, and interpreting data from these tools. OBJECTIVES: To assess the performance of a technical platform for collecting and transmitting data from six mobile technologies in the clinic and at home, to apply methods for comparing them to clinical standard devices, and to measure their usability, including how willing subjects were to use them on a regular basis. METHODS: In part 1 of the study, conducted over 3 weeks in the clinic, we tested two device pairs (mobile vs. clinical standard blood pressure monitor and mobile vs. clinical standard spirometer) on 25 healthy volunteers. In part 2 of the study, conducted over 3 days both in the clinic and at home, we tested the same two device pairs as in part 1, plus four additional pairs (mobile vs. clinical standard pulse oximeter, glucose meter, weight scale, and activity monitor), on 22 healthy volunteers. RESULTS: Data collection reliability was 98.1% in part 1 of the study and 95.8% in part 2 (the percentages exclude the wearable activity monitor, which collects data continuously). In part 1, 20 of 1,049 overall expected measurements were missing (1.9%), and in part 2, 45 of 1,083 were missing (4.2%). The most common reason for missing data was a single malfunctioning spirometer (13 of 20 total missed readings) in part 1, and that the subject did not take the measurement (22 of 45 total missed readings) in part 2. Also in part 2, a higher proportion of at-home measurements than in-clinic readings were missing (12.6 vs. 2.7%). The data from this experimental study were unable to establish repeatability or agreement for every mobile technology; only the pulse oximeter demonstrated repeatability, and only the weight scale demonstrated agreement with the clinical standard device. Most mobile technologies received high "willingness to use" ratings from the patients on the questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the wireless data transmission and processing platform was dependable. It also identified three critical areas of study for advancing the use of mobile technologies in clinical research: (1) if a mobile technology captures more than one type of endpoint (such as blood pressure and pulse), repeatability and agreement may need to be established for each endpoint to be included in a clinical trial; (2) researchers need to develop criteria for excluding invalid device readings (to be identified by algorithms in real time) for the population studied using ranges based on accumulated subject data and established norms; and (3) careful examination of a mobile technology's performance (reliability, repeatability, and agreement with accepted reference devices) during pilot testing is essential, even for medical devices approved by regulators.

Estimating mass balance for inhaled drugs in humans: an example with a VLA-4 antagonist, IVL745.

IVL745 is an inhaled VLA-4 antagonist developed for the treatment of asthma. Following inhalation (Inh), a fraction of the drug is deposited in the oropharynx, and the rest is deposited in the lungs. For inhaled drugs, it is technically and ethically difficult to formulate and administer radiolabeled drugs. Hence, if the drug is metabolically stable in the lungs, mass balance and metabolism of inhaled drugs, such as IVL745, can be determined by administering radiolabeled intravenous (IV) and oral drugs and by comparing with the data following Inh administration. The study was a three-period crossover design in 6 healthy subjects to evaluate the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination following IV and oral administration of (14)C-IVL745 (4 mg/50 microCi) and inhaled (10-mg) dose. Serial sampling of blood and excreta was performed maximally up to 168 hours postdose. Plasma IVL745 concentrations were determined using a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method with a minimum quantifiable limit of 10 pg/mL. Overall, the drug was safe and well tolerated. The recovery of the radioactive dose varied from 94.8% to 117% for both IV and oral administration. Following IV administration, 90.2% of the radioactive dose was recovered in the feces, suggesting extensive biliary excretion of the drug. After oral administration, 99.7% of the radioactivity was recovered in the feces, and no radioactivity was detected in plasma, suggesting lack of absorption of the drug. Negligible (14)C-radioactivity concentrations were observed in the red blood cell fractions. The mean t(1/2) values were 1.6, 1.5, and 4.4 hours following IV, oral, and Inh administration, respectively. The oral bioavailability of IVL745 was low (< 2%), and the inhaled bioavailability was 26%. The volume of distribution at steady state (V(ss)) was low (19.0 L). The predicted blood clearance of IVL745 was 86 L/h, which was comparable to the commonly used liver blood flow value of 90 L/h. Only a minor fraction of the dose was excreted in the urine with low to moderate renal clearance. The parent drug accounted for 77% to 89% of the dosed radioactivity in excreta. Two major metabolites observed in excreta were mono-o-desmethyl IVL745 and di-o-desmethyl IVL745. The data showed that the drug had negligible oral bioavailability, low oral absorption, 26% inhaled bioavailability, low extent of metabolism, high biliary excretion, and low renal clearance. This knowledge may aid in the prediction of potentially relevant drug-drug interactions and dosing adjustments in high-risk populations for IVL745.

Effect of IVL745, a VLA-4 antagonist, on allergen-induced bronchoconstriction in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Very late antigen (VLA-4) antagonists have been proposed as potential therapies for diseases in which cell recruitment and accumulation are causative. Asthma, which is characterized by airway inflammation involving the accumulation of eosinophils and mononuclear cells, is one such disease. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the effect of IVL745, a VLA-4 antagonist, on the early and late asthmatic response (LAR) and on markers of airway inflammation after allergen inhalation. METHODS: The study was of a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, 2-way crossover design. Sixteen subjects with mild-to-moderate asthma controlled with short-acting beta2-agonists only and with a LAR to inhaled allergen participated in the study. At one treatment period they took 20 mg of IVL745 and one treatment period placebo. Both treatments were taken twice daily for 7 days, with a single dose on day 8. Treatments were separated by a washout period of at least 2 weeks. On day 7 of each treatment period, sputum was induced and collected, and exhaled nitric oxide (NO) was measured. On day 8, an inhaled bolus allergen challenge was performed, and blood was taken for pharmacokinetics. On day 9, exhaled NO was measured, and a methacholine challenge was done. On day 10, sputum was induced and collected. Adverse events, peak expiratory flow (PEF), use of short-acting beta2-agonists, and asthma symptoms were recorded daily throughout the study. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between IVL745 and placebo in the effect on the LAR after allergen challenge, as measured by the area under the curve of the percentage change in FEV1 from the prechallenge baseline (mean [SEM], -81.99 [18.80] after IVL745 and -72.58 [21.29] after placebo; 95% CI of difference, -36 to 16.8; P = .46) or by the maximum percentage change from the prechallenge baseline (mean [SEM], -23.44 [4.73] after IVL745 and -21.30 [5.17] after placebo; 95% CI of difference, -11 to 6.29; P = .60). There was a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of eosinophils in sputum on day 7 of treatment with IVL745 (mean [SEM], 7.32 [1.46]) compared with placebo (mean [SEM], 15.00 [1.92]; 95% CI of difference, -13 to -1.2; P = .02). There was no statistically significant difference between IVL745 and placebo with respect to the early asthmatic response, methacholine hyperresponsiveness, exhaled NO, postallergen sputum, symptoms, inhaled beta2-agonist use, or PEF. CONCLUSION: In patients with mild-to-moderate atopic asthma, IVL745 did not affect the early and late response to inhaled allergen or markers of airway inflammation, except for a modest reduction in sputum eosinophils.

Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of a lipid-lowering adenosine A1 agonist, RPR749, in healthy subjects.

RPR749 and its methylated metabolite are orally active and selective adenosine A(1) agonists that can inhibit lipolysis and lower plasma triglyceride levels in a variety of animal models. RPR749 also appears to lower free fatty acid (FFA) and insulin levels and may have additional lipid-modifying effects. This double-blind, single increasing-dose, placebo-controlled, parallel group, randomized study, the first done in humans, evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics (effect on FFA) after a single oral dose of up to 200 mg RPR749 or placebo. Six parallel groups of 8 healthy men (6 active and 2 placebo/group) were enrolled in the study. Plasma samples were collected for up to 72 hours post-dose. RPR749 and its metabolite RPR772 concentrations were measured by a validated LC/MS/MS method with a minimal quantifiable limit of 1 ng/mL. RPR749 was safe and well tolerated as a single oral dose up to 200 mg. The mean plasma concentrations of RPR749 were approximately 30-fold higher than the mean RPR772 plasma concentrations. The mean terminal half-life (t(1/2)) of RPR749 and RPR772 were similar (approximately 16.4 hours). Mean values for serum insulin, triglycerides, glycerol, and blood glucose remained within normal ranges. Mean FFA concentrations in serum decreased in all treatment groups with the maximal decrease in the 200-mg dose group. In conclusion, RPR749 has the ability to reduce circulating levels of FFA that can be related to plasma RPR749 concentrations and thus possesses pharmacological properties that may be beneficial in treating coronary artery diseases and hyperlipidemia.

Pharmacoscintigraphic comparison of HMR 1031, a VLA-4 antagonist, in healthy volunteers following delivery via a nebulizer and a dry powder inhaler.

A pharmacoscintigraphic study was conducted to compare the dose deposition of HMR 1031 from the existing nebulizer formulation and the new Ultrahaler device to help determine the doses for future phase 2 trials. This was a single-dose, open-label, randomized, two-way crossover study in which HMR 1031 (3 mg) was delivered by the Ultrahaler and the Pari LC Star nebulizer to 12 healthy male subjects. For both treatments, the formulations were radiolabeled with technetium-99m pertechnetate such that a maximum of 10 MBq was delivered on each study day. Scintigraphic images were acquired immediately after dosing to estimate the percentage of the dose delivered to the lungs and oropharynx. Serial plasma samples were collected up to 12 hours post-dose on each occasion and analyzed for HMR 1031 by a LC/MS/MS method with a lower limit of quantitation of 10 pg/mL (0.01 ng/mL). Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated for HMR 1031 using noncompartmental methods. No serious adverse events were reported. The systemic absorption of HMR 1031 following inhalation administration was relatively rapid, with median T(max) values of 0.5 hours and 1.0 hours post-dose after administration via Ultrahaler and nebulizer, respectively. The mean plasma AUC(0-12) (Ultrahaler, 15.8 ng*h/mL; nebulizer, 11.1 ng*h/mL) and C(max) (Ultrahaler, 4.96 ng/mL; nebulizer, 2.28 ng/mL) values were approximately 42% and 118% higher for the Ultrahaler compared with the nebulizer. The mean terminal half-life of HMR 1031 was similar after administration from both devices (2.91 and 3.18 hours). Based on the scintigraphic data, the lung deposition of HMR 1031 after administration by Ultrahaler (24.6% of the administered dose) was approximately 37% higher compared with the lung deposition from the nebulizer (18.0% of the administered dose). This observation was in agreement with the relative difference in the plasma AUC values achieved after administration of the two formulations. The in vivo results based on the scintigraphic data were also comparable with those from in vitro studies for the Ultrahaler. Based on the ratio of the dose delivered by both the formulations, the required doses for the future Ultrahaler formulation can be predicted.